Alachua County board reviews guiding principles; consultants to release three draft boundary scenarios Feb. 2

The Alachua County School Board on Jan. 12 reviewed the conclusion of Phase 1 of a districtwide long‑range planning project and discussed a calendar for public review of draft boundary scenarios and next steps.

Kathy Ebaugh, a consultant with JB Pro, told the board the visioning phase gathered input from 2,297 unique respondents and more than 50,000 individual comments across in‑person and online activities and produced a set of 12 guiding principles "grounded in a robust, inclusive, and transparent process," she said. Ebaugh described the principles as a framework, not final policy, that will guide Phase 2 analysis of enrollment, facilities, transportation and program priorities.

The presentation explained the three‑phase structure of the Our Schools Future Ready project: Phase 1 (visioning and community input), Phase 2 (data evaluation and development of up to three draft boundary scenarios), and Phase 3 (synthesis and board consideration of final recommendations). "Phase 1 did not make any final decisions about attendance boundaries, facilities, or investments," Ebaugh told the board.

Public commenters urged the district to prioritize fiscal planning and careful use of facilities. Ted Dabracchi said the recently opened Terwilliger School "has been completely underutilized" and urged a multi‑year financial plan. Armando Grundy Gomez told trustees they should assess districtwide enrollment and facility use and cautioned about adopting artificial‑intelligence policy without safeguards, saying "you cannot just go and talk about policy and utilize AI ... and not check for hallucinations." Gomez also warned about enrollment declines elsewhere and urged the board to consider reducing physical footprint where appropriate.

Board members spent much of the meeting probing the timeline and format for Phase 2 public engagement. In response, consultants said three draft scenario maps will be posted for public review on Feb. 2 and that the district intends to hold a series of community sessions across the county through Feb. 18 to gather detailed feedback. Ebaugh said sessions will include a short presentation followed by stations staffed by facilitators so participants can examine maps, ask questions and register preferences; the team also plans online engagement and targeted stakeholder workshops.

Several trustees pushed for additional opportunities for the public to address the board directly. Board members asked staff to schedule a board workshop around Feb. 17 to discuss the three proposals, a March 3 meeting to review final materials, and to hold a March 12 special meeting as the target date for a final vote if more time is needed. "We will be releasing the maps for the community on the second of February," Ebaugh said. The district and consultants emphasized those draft scenarios are tools for discussion and that final recommendations will follow the February engagement and internal analysis.

Consultants also described the analytical approach: team members said they used qualitative thematic coding across thousands of written and interactive responses, with cross‑checks to validate themes. The consultants told the board the raw, coded data and supporting documentation will be posted publicly for trustees and community members to review.

Trustees raised policy and operational questions that will be folded into Phase 2 analysis, including how the district will account for concurrency and new housing developments in overcapacity attendance zones. Board members asked whether concurrency reviews and the district’s authority under Policy 51‑20 could be used to route new development to schools with capacity rather than automatically assigning students to crowded neighborhood schools; consultants said those data will be integrated into the map modeling and recommendations.

The board did not take formal votes at the meeting. Members agreed to proceed with the published timeline and to use the February engagement period to gather community feedback before reviewing final recommendations in March. The workshop adjourned at 7:28 p.m.